tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24054705359429860042024-03-05T18:25:12.110-06:00One Still FreeOne ruralist, contrarian individual's thoughts on what's what, because it's still a free country (USA).credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-32411069191030110682014-08-25T10:20:00.001-06:002014-08-25T10:20:19.811-06:00Witch Hunting in the 21st Century<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7_t7J-v5DhaYVsABTRsUEDkRHPjObriYl8ih7QM9MPgUZMPqRSggUZdIk_1W0TAO3T244MZwBakPCsnRpmsVI5O4hoIs861deZ3cJqV9lGgJDpoRw7xji-5ptKzB0xYIyjY1GNgDSbSmS/s1600/FB-enabler.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7_t7J-v5DhaYVsABTRsUEDkRHPjObriYl8ih7QM9MPgUZMPqRSggUZdIk_1W0TAO3T244MZwBakPCsnRpmsVI5O4hoIs861deZ3cJqV9lGgJDpoRw7xji-5ptKzB0xYIyjY1GNgDSbSmS/s1600/FB-enabler.jpg" height="176" width="200" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Click to enlarge</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
I'm not saying that there really is witch hunting going on, though I suppose certain terrorists would claim they're seeking to rid the world of evil non-believers.<br /><br />But I am saying that humanity hasn't evolved much from the earliest days. People still jump to conclusions. People are still fast - very fast - to condemn. Social media just lets people condemn faster.<br /><br />There's that big book that so many people claim to follow these days, but "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not a concept that seems to apply to them. <br /><br />Funny how that works.<br /><br />
<br />credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-18048303854122591932014-01-08T10:22:00.001-07:002014-01-08T10:44:41.055-07:00The more things change...<i>Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose</i> is how they say it in France*. <i>The more it changes, the more it's the same thing</i>, and that's just the situation we've got here with the plywood industry in the US.<br />
<br />
Remember that bailout thing a few years ago? How'd that work out for your business? Now the US Government is helping China undercut US businesses. How do you figure that'll work out for you, the citizen?<br />
<br />
Kip Howlett, president of the Hardwood Plywood and Veneer Association, says 25% of the overall hardwood plywood capacity in the US has been permanently shut down because companies have gone out of business due to China's "dumping", defined by the US Department of Commerce as "a foreign company selling a product in the U.S. at less than its fair value".<br />
<br />
Although a big chunk of US producers petitioned the US International Trade Commission to block the dumping, the ITC voted against doing anything last November, stating that the plywood industry in the United States is <i>not </i>threatened by plywood from China, even though the production of the plywood is subsidized by the Chinese government and the Chinese plywood undercuts US plywood by up to 56% in some cases. <br />
<br />
In refusing to do anything about the dumping, the ITC has essentially voted to favor China's plywood sales over those of the US. But then, <i>Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose, </i>you know? The US government we have today isn't really any different than any other government when it comes down to it: Government exists to serve its own best interests and screw the people.<br />
<br />
You can read more <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/02/plywood-industry-plea-for-help-rejected/4288667/" target="_blank">HERE</a> (USA Today article), and find links to several more articles <a href="http://www.aa-hp.org/#!news/c73g" target="_blank">HERE</a>. <br />
<br />
________<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">* Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr said it first in his his journal Les Guêpes (“The Wasps”), January 1849</span><br />
<br />
<br />credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-38605233615797630042013-07-01T11:50:00.001-06:002013-07-01T11:52:06.209-06:00Fire, Death and TaxesMy condolences to families and friends of the firefighters who were killed in the Yarnell fire in AZ yesterday.<br /><br />It is a terrible tragedy, all the worse because it might have been prevented. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Back in 2003 the <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/chapter-84" target="_blank">Healthy Forests Restoration Act</a> (HFRA) was passed, good legislation that has, aside from an initial flurry of <a href="http://www.fs.fed.us/projects/hfi/field-guide/web/page15.php" target="_blank">Community Wildfire Protection Plans</a> (CWPP), been pretty much ignored. The initial funding that made HFRA seem like a light at the end of the tunnel was withdrawn years ago from forest restoration and hazardous fuels reduction projects in the southwest and everywhere else. Environmental groups that had promised to support the scientifically based planning of the projects reneged and began fighting projects tooth and nail instead. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Five years after HFRA was passed it was known that it wasn't working. At that point only about 213,000 acres of forest had been treated. In 2008 alone wildfires burned 5 million acres - 1.5 million more acres than burned in 2003, the year the act was passed. In 2008 it was reported that <a href="http://www.eenews.net/stories/71006" target="_blank">"The worst fire seasons of the last eight years were in 2006 and 2007, with 9.1 million acres and 9.4 million acres burned, respectively."</a> But even knowing that it wasn't working didn't bring about increased forest restoration efforts. Thus last year and the year before another 18 million acres were destroyed (<a href="http://www.usfa.fema.gov/statistics/estimates/wildfire.shtm" target="_blank">9.3 million in 2012 and 8.7 million in 2011</a>).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Environmental groups that initially not only supported HFRA but entered into agreements about how it would be implemented - including pledging to not fight forest restoration - were quick to turn traitor.</b> In the Gila National Forest, where the Silver Fire has consumed over 125,000 acres to date and last year's Whitewater-Baldy Complex fire took an additional 300,000 acres, only a <i>few thousand</i> acres of forest restoration has been accomplished since HFRA, not the tens of thousands of acres needing treatment every year just to keep up with growth. And only a few miles to the west in Arizona, the Wallow Fire destroyed well over half a million acres two years ago - same ecological environment, same Ponderosa pine forest, same wildlife and habitats, the watersheds for Phoenix and the Colorado River. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Eyewitnesses report that representatives from environmental groups flat-out forbid significant logging in the forests. They refuse to allow thinning of even the drought-stricken, fire-prone, disease-ridden areas of forest to bring them to some kind of healthy condition so that they wouldn't simply burn up the moment a careless camper left hot coals, or lightning struck a Ponderosa pine on a hillside. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
More than <a href="http://www.usfa.fema.gov/statistics/estimates/wildfire.shtm" target="_blank">72.6 million acres of forest has burned</a> over the last 10 years (not counting the fires so far this year, which have already consumed considerable acreage). Here in the southwest the fires are becoming worse and worse - they are not "natural and healthy", they are fires that destroy so completely that decades later there is just scrub where there used to be mighty pines. Some scientists estimate it will be hundreds of years before there will be forests again.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>This is not forest management by science-based public agencies. This is private agenda management of public resources by non-governmental entities</b>, who care less about the health of our forests. It is these groups that have ground restoration and hazardous fuels reduction projects to a crawl - not logging, not grazing, not any of the BS the mighty environmentalist propaganda machines feed the public. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If environmentalist methods worked, then the Yarnell firefighters wouldn't have been in the path of a raging, out-of-control wildfire.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But now it's too late. Ten years of opportunity is gone. Instead of taxpayer dollars going towards proactively addressing forest health, now millions and millions have to be spent on suppression. Not only is the "closing the barn door after the horse has escaped" approach not working, it's become a national tragedy, with loss of human life, destruction of homes and businesses and ruining of watersheds, not to mention the agony of the animals in the forest that die from burning alive, or from slow starvation because of habitat loss.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And it's not going to stop, not if environmentalist are left in charge of our public lands.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-59404568084280033522012-08-30T09:35:00.000-06:002012-08-30T10:21:05.806-06:00Shunning: Try it, it works."<i>Bic "Lady" pens unleash Amazon snarkfest</i>" says Washington Post headlines today. "<i>Bic is being trolled hard by fake Amazon reviews, and it’s brought them that unique combination of shame and free publicity that only an Internet prank can achieve</i>."<br />
<br />
Prank? I think not. I have long understood that advertisers on purpose create ad campaigns that seem on the surface to be gigantic errors but in fact are well crafted calculations of risk. They know that the absolute worst thing that could happen to any business is shunning but they also know that in this day of social media, people absolutely *must* rush to comment/review/defend - and the "outrage" provides free name recognition that any less risky/controversial advertising wouldn't. <br />
<br />
You might not buy a Lady Bic, but I bet the Bic label will jump out at you when you look at pens, now. You'll want to see what those Lady Bics look like if nothing else. See? It worked.<br />
<br />
Social media is a great tool for this kind of calculated on-purpose negative advertising. People with good intentions post shocking image after image, comment after comment, and in doing so the nasty stuff gets lots of free publicity. Do-gooders think that their postings and clever comments will somehow motivate people to act against the issue, but I'm pretty sure that's more than evenly balanced by the voyeurs who really appreciate the ugly photos, and the people who have been newly introduced by the do-gooders to the nastiness and who can now embrace it themselves. <br />
<br />
Various entities have long used negative advertising successfully. Environmental groups provide a superb example: They have raised the fear level so high that they support themselves (their board members) very well, while never doing any actual environmental work. Their negative advertising - like with other entities, such as religion and government - has created such a general fear in the population that people will believe what they are told in direct contradiction to what their own senses and non-biased history and fact tell them. <br />
<br />
<b>You can't fight city hall</b><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
That's what they say, and it's true. You can't fight the people with that much money/power. But oh, baby, you have a super power that will slap them dead if you will just use it: The power of shunning. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Social rejection is the worst thing that can happen in human society - individuals who are shunned can suffer severe psychological damage from it, and groups can wither away to nothing from it. Social media rejection is death to business. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shunning has been part of human strategy since cave-man time, because it works. Paying attention to something feeds it, withdrawing attention from - shunning - starves it, whether it's a human being, a business, an organization or a political entity, and whether the attention is in the form of money, time, effort or, well, just plain attention. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Be careful what you shun, though. Make sure your target is right on. For example, if you shun well, you don't pass around photos of a football player's torn-up dogs; instead you shun the man himself, the team that supports him and the organizations that supposedly are created to prevent animal abuse that didn't act. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shunning isn't just doing nothing - they pay advertising companies big bucks to entice you and they're very, <i>very </i>good at it. They prey on human curiosity and they taint it with fear, so you can't not look, not if you want to be safe. Curiosity and fear: two basic components of human survival tactics that are hard-wired into us all. Doesn't mean we can't overcome it, of course, but it does mean effort. Shunning is actually harder to do than you'd think, but it works, oh yes it truly does.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As for Bic Lady pens? Amazon keeps track of hits on their pages and if they get lots of hits they'll keep supporting that kind of advertising. Bic, too, will know that their negative-advertising ploy has worked. If you succumb to the desire to read the snarky reviews, you'll be part of the problem, not the solution. Try shunning the Amazon Lady Bic pen and it will just fade away. Honest - shunning works, but only if you actually do it.</blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-56068886344982736072012-06-30T11:40:00.000-06:002012-06-30T11:40:07.977-06:00Insurance - It Never Ends<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Copyright © 2012 CR Edmunds</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Vehicle<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>First</u> you just paid for your own repairs if you got
into an accident. And if you hurt
someone else or you damaged their car, the court system would make you pay for
that, too.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Then</u> the government said you had to get vehicle
insurance because you <i>might</i> get in an
accident and hurt someone else or damage their car, even if you are an
excellent driver. Even if you never have
a claim, you keep paying and you get no interest on all those payments - the
money’s just down the drain. But it’s supposed
to be okay because your money is being used in a pool to cover <i>other</i> people’s accidents because there
isn’t enough money in the pool to cover all the insurance payments being made.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>And then</u> you had to get vehicle insurance because <i>the other guy</i> in an accident that you might
never get into might not have insurance.
Even though you pay it month after month, year after year, you keep
paying that one so that all the <i>other</i>
people who haven’t paid for their own insurance or for the other uninsured guy
in their accident are covered by insurance anyway. You know, they still call it insurance, but
it’s really a tax, isn't it? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Medical<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>First</u> you just took responsibility for your own
health and if you got ill or injured, you paid the healer, doctor and/or hospital
yourself. If you couldn’t afford it and
you couldn’t beg or borrow the money, you died.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>Then</u> insurance made it easier to not worry about
medical bills, so you stopped taking responsibility for your own health and if
you got ill or injured, you let the medical system take care of you and let
the insurance company pay for the doctor and or hospital.
You still ended up dying – it just took longer and cost more, but that
was okay because there was a pool of insurance money that covered it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u>And then</u> <i>everyone</i>
was forced to get medical insurance because so many people were no longer
taking responsibility for their health that the insurance money pool wasn’t big
enough. So now even the people who are
healthy and willing to pay for their own medical costs have to get
insurance. And if you don’t pay for it
as insurance, you pay for it as a tax – at least the government is honest
enough to call the spade a spade - but you pay no matter what, and you pay as
long as you’re still alive to be paying, whether it benefits you or not.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>What’s next?<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It’s only logical for every homeowner to be forced to get disaster
insurance that covers tornado, hurricane, flood, mudslide, earthquake, blizzard,
fire and tsunami, no matter where they live or what the risk is of any given disaster. Because, you know,
that will make the insurance pool bigger so everyone can keep building houses
in inappropriate places and building houses that aren’t constructed to withstand
natural disasters. We need to be sure that homeowners keep getting compensated when
a natural disaster wipes them out regardless of the reason it happens, or how often it happens. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We need insurance to cover food shortages, including contaminated food. Because, you know, having insurance will ensure that there's always food in the grocery store, and having insurance will compensate for price gougers when natural disasters wipe out food crops, or there's no fuel to bring food in from other countries (we can't grow food on agricultural land that housing developments now occupy, of course).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white;">And what about the rest of the world? </span>We should all start paying for the poor people who live in
other countries who don’t have insurance of any kind – they need medical care,
they need to drive vehicles, they need coverage for their houses in case of
disaster. And those bad foreign people
who just don’t want to pay for insurance – we need to pay for them too, since
the insurance pool needs to be large enough to cover everything and everyone. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We all should start paying into the insurance pool now for
future generations, too, because they will need coverage - given the
economy, they won’t be able to earn enough to pay for their own vehicle,
medical, homeowner’s or food shortage insurance. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There must be something else that could be insured. We don't want people being responsible for themselves - it isn't fair!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh yeah: We should start paying for insurance for insurance,
because after a while I, for one, won’t be earning enough money to pay for all
the mandatory insurance so you all should pay into the pool to cover me. And heck, why should I pay all that out now? It'll never stop and I'll never get ahead. Maybe I should just stop working and let that insurance pool cover all my needs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sounds like a plan. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-26318290587298359372012-02-17T12:29:00.009-07:002012-02-17T12:56:32.915-07:00In spite of murder, the Mexican wolf population increases<blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="" style="font-style: normal; ">The pro-Mexican wolf community is waxing on about the increase in wolf population as determined by the recent wolf count: The number is now up to 58. </blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">That would be 58 wolves <i>counted</i>, of course - not the number that actually exists in the wild, which is a higher number than that. There are - and have been for years - an unknown but strongly existing uncollared wolf population, one that isn't constantly messed with by the wolf program just because the uncollared wolves can't be so easily located.</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">Recently Mexican wolf supporter Nancy <span style="font-size: 100%; ">Kaminski <a href="http://www.blogger.com/<a%20href=%22http://www.gilacommunity.net/viewtopic.php?f=124&t=9111%22>Good%20News,%20Lobo%20Population%20grew%20in%202011</a>">posted online</a> "</span><span style="font-size: 100%; ">Through it all, the murders, natural disasters, deaths by vehicle, Game and Fish Departments running for the hills and a shortage of possible mates for dispersers, the population of Mexican wolves grew in 2011. "</span></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite=""><span style="font-style: normal; ">Don't you just love the choice of words? Given that the definition of murder is </span><i>the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another</i>, one wonders what human being Kaminski was referring to that was murdered, since unlawful wolf killings are just that: the killing of a wolf unlawfully. But how silly of me to expect pro-wolf people to use unbiased language, or have an unbiased, scientific approach, to their commentary.<br /><br />Wouldn't it be ironic, though, if the reason for the increase in wolves might simply be because of Catron County and other efforts to get the wolf program to stop releasing habituated wolves, to remove habituated wolves from the wild instead of trap and transport elsewhere to be someone else's problem, and to get the State of New Mexico to withdraw from the program? Wouldn't it be a joke on Ms. Kaminski and other wolf lovers if maybe the reason that the Mexican wolf population this year has increased is simply because the wolf program people have been forced to stop screwing <span style="font-size: 100%; ">so much </span><span style="font-size: 100%; ">with the wolves, giving wolves a better chance to act like normal wild animals? After all, it is a </span><i style="font-size: 100%; ">fact of science</i><span style="font-size: 100%; "> that frequent handling of wild animals stresses them and ruins their chances for reproductive success and thriving in the wild. </span></blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">But heaven forbid the Mexican wolf program should be based on science. Not when there's all that murder going on.</blockquote><blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite=""><br /></blockquote><div id="-chrome-auto-translate-plugin-dialog" style="opacity: 1 !important; background-image: initial !important; background-attachment: initial !important; background-origin: initial !important; background-clip: initial !important; background-color: transparent !important; padding-top: 0px !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0px !important; padding-left: 0px !important; margin-top: 0px !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; position: absolute !important; top: 0px; left: 0px; overflow-x: visible !important; overflow-y: visible !important; z-index: 999999 !important; text-align: left !important; display: none; "><div style="max-width: 300px !important;color: #fafafa !important;opacity: 0.8 !important;border-color: #000000 !important;border-width: 0px !important;-webkit-border-radius: 10px !important;background-color: #363636 !important;font-size: 16px !important;padding: 8px !important;overflow: visible !important;background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, right bottom, color-stop(0%, #000), color-stop(50%, #363636), color-stop(100%, #000));z-index: 999999 !important;text-align: left !important;"><div class="translate"></div><div class="additional"></div></div><img src="http://www.google.com/uds/css/small-logo.png" style="position: absolute !important; z-index: -1 !important; right: 1px !important; top: -20px !important; cursor: pointer !important;-webkit-border-radius: 20px; background-color: rgba(200, 200, 200, 0.3) !important; padding: 3px 5px 0 !important; margin: 0 !important;" onclick="document.location.href='http://translate.google.com/';" /></div>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-31581099515907544992012-01-26T11:39:00.002-07:002012-01-26T11:41:19.237-07:00Cartoon<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNd9KS43qUAZ_mTbCGSeYzKs9bNtoB-JmebwaN7yb2zEOZ3mcNWBN9eWoRn7AQeJLpqKtwHGlldOSinM2vtXA4sNIVkZPa8GIPA_86MKE_KsuiFc0_GNsVaHcPR40WqX3UsUjBFX2au1GJ/s1600/WallowFireCartoon01.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 310px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNd9KS43qUAZ_mTbCGSeYzKs9bNtoB-JmebwaN7yb2zEOZ3mcNWBN9eWoRn7AQeJLpqKtwHGlldOSinM2vtXA4sNIVkZPa8GIPA_86MKE_KsuiFc0_GNsVaHcPR40WqX3UsUjBFX2au1GJ/s400/WallowFireCartoon01.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5702012317317213634" /></a><br /><br /><div id="-chrome-auto-translate-plugin-dialog" style="opacity: 1 !important; background-image: initial !important; background-attachment: initial !important; background-origin: initial !important; background-clip: initial !important; background-color: transparent !important; padding-top: 0px !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0px !important; padding-left: 0px !important; margin-top: 0px !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; position: absolute !important; top: 0px; left: 0px; overflow-x: visible !important; overflow-y: visible !important; z-index: 999999 !important; text-align: left !important; display: none; background-position: initial initial !important; background-repeat: initial initial !important; "><div style="max-width: 300px !important;color: #fafafa !important;opacity: 0.8 !important;border-color: #000000 !important;border-width: 0px !important;-webkit-border-radius: 10px !important;background-color: #363636 !important;font-size: 16px !important;padding: 8px !important;overflow: visible !important;background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, right bottom, color-stop(0%, #000), color-stop(50%, #363636), color-stop(100%, #000));z-index: 999999 !important;text-align: left !important;"><div class="translate"></div><div class="additional"></div></div><img src="http://www.google.com/uds/css/small-logo.png" style="position: absolute !important; z-index: -1 !important; right: 1px !important; top: -20px !important; cursor: pointer !important;-webkit-border-radius: 20px; background-color: rgba(200, 200, 200, 0.3) !important; padding: 3px 5px 0 !important; margin: 0 !important;" onclick="document.location.href='http://translate.google.com/';" /></div>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-8789202466713397532012-01-18T11:40:00.001-07:002012-01-18T11:43:14.425-07:00US Constitution: First Amendment<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinw96S7eri9ulQDatzLFcLMBWRve0E4ramK8upqmHQF_7wMhah8GV97fGG5YWGBfx2hFzfKBuJNxXihs5trkutQag7znKiviKODvjDMNPo67pY0mjk2EwCoKppzzJ_Ra0gUWpC5QG3DSPk/s1600/SOPA-PIPA.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 263px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinw96S7eri9ulQDatzLFcLMBWRve0E4ramK8upqmHQF_7wMhah8GV97fGG5YWGBfx2hFzfKBuJNxXihs5trkutQag7znKiviKODvjDMNPo67pY0mjk2EwCoKppzzJ_Ra0gUWpC5QG3DSPk/s400/SOPA-PIPA.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5699044223913942226" /></a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-54642305071815490772011-09-11T12:38:00.002-06:002011-09-11T12:41:40.653-06:00Living In Freedom<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; ">Terrorism isn't about blowing up buildings or killing people. Terrorism is intimidation. The attacks of September 11, 2001 have achieved a terrorist victory that we Americans gave to them: They hit the twin towers, but we've allowed ourselves - encouraged ourselves - to succumb to the fear. <a href="http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474980242970">Full article by Lif Strand</a></span><div id="-chrome-auto-translate-plugin-dialog" style="opacity: 1 !important; background-image: initial !important; background-attachment: initial !important; background-origin: initial !important; background-clip: initial !important; background-color: transparent !important; padding-top: 0px !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0px !important; padding-left: 0px !important; margin-top: 0px !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-bottom: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; position: absolute !important; top: 0px; left: 0px; overflow-x: visible !important; overflow-y: visible !important; z-index: 999999 !important; text-align: left !important; display: none; background-position: initial initial !important; background-repeat: initial initial !important; "><div style="max-width: 300px !important;color: #fafafa !important;opacity: 0.8 !important;border-color: #000000 !important;border-width: 0px !important;-webkit-border-radius: 10px !important;background-color: #363636 !important;font-size: 16px !important;padding: 8px !important;overflow: visible !important;background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, right bottom, color-stop(0%, #000), color-stop(50%, #363636), color-stop(100%, #000));z-index: 999999 !important;text-align: left !important;"><div class="translate"></div><div class="additional"></div></div><img src="http://www.google.com/uds/css/small-logo.png" onclick="document.location.href='http://translate.google.com/';" style="position: absolute !important; z-index: -1 !important; right: 1px !important; top: -20px !important; cursor: pointer !important;-webkit-border-radius: 20px; background-color: rgba(200, 200, 200, 0.3) !important; padding: 3px 5px 0 !important; margin: 0 !important;" /></div>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-72614041380778621972011-08-05T17:42:00.003-06:002011-08-05T17:47:52.617-06:00DoW: They say they don't make things up...In their ongoing war against environmental truth, Defenders of Wildlife just put out an article entitled "<a href="http://www.defendersblog.org/2011/08/we-can%E2%80%99t-make-this-stuff-up/comment-page-1/#comment-19894">We Can't Make These Things Up</a>", professing horror that NM Game & Fish have lifted their ban on trapping.<br /><br />Author James Navarro wrote: <span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"At least 14 endangered Mexican gray wolves have been caught in traps set for other animals, and many have been injured. Two were so badly maimed that their afflicted legs had to be amputated."</span><br /><br />What the article doesn't bother pointing out is that Mexican wolves are damaged by trapping <span style="font-style: italic;">by the Mexican wolf program people themselves</span>, in their incessant messing with the animals to replace batteries in collars, perform veterinary exams, give vaccinations and sometimes to haul adult wolves back to civilization to be force-bred and pups to be captive raised. <br /><br />Defenders of Wildlife may not make things up, but they are notorious for not telling the full story. The Mexican wolf program is the biggest abuser of Mexican wolves there is.<br /><br />As always, I urge people to read the Mexican wolf program's monthly and annual reports if they want the <span style="font-style: italic;">full </span>truth.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-34016008998189584882011-07-11T10:13:00.002-06:002011-07-11T10:17:02.911-06:00Tucson: The environmental litigation factory capitol of AmericaTucson is the environmental litigation factory capitol of America. Tucson is home to the Center for Biological Diversity which has been spewing out lawsuits over alleged violations of the Endangered Species Act. And the CBD has been raking in millions in legal fees for these lawsuits under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).<br /><br />Nationally the CBD has become the poster child of a litigious environmental group...prompting Congress to actually try and reform the Equal Access to Justice Act and cut off the pipeline of taxpayer money to the CBD and other similar environmental litigation factories such as Western Watershed Project and WildEarth Guardians.<br /><br />CBD engages in what some call the "EAJA racket".<br /><br />Read full article at <a href="http://www.insidetucsonbusiness.com/news/tucson-the-environmental-litigation-factory-capitol-of-america/article_5dd3355c-a8da-11e0-b279-001cc4c002e0.html">InsideTucsonBusiness.com</a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-77191755682160394762011-06-24T13:40:00.004-06:002011-06-24T14:20:39.554-06:00EnviroSpinCopyright © 2011 C. R. Edmunds<br />www.onestillfree.com June 24, 2011<br /><br />Spin is a term used to describe a process of twisting strands of fiber together to form thread, yarn, rope and such. It is also used to describe twisting information in a way so as to create a new description of reality, a new thread of thought so to speak. At its darkest, spin is a way of manipulating the thought of others as a means to an end that the others might not agree with if they were told the same story with all the facts unspun.<br /><br />Let me give you a couple examples of this thing I call envirospin, taken from a pair of news releases put out just today by Wild Earth Guardians and Defenders of Wildlife. Both of them basically are some quick spinning of facts to “prove” that environmentalists aren’t to blame for the massive catastrophic wildfires now occurring around the US.<br /><br />WEG’s envirospin is in the form of a kind of sleight of hand in their news release, “Lack of Logging Isn’t To Blame in Massive Forest Fires”. Here we have the statement that there have been “few lawsuits challenging sensible fuel reduction on the national forests in the last decade”. On the surface that’s of course true – but only because a) all the suing was done <i>before </i>the last decade, b) the definition of “sensible” fuel reduction is defined by the environmental groups themselves, and c) this decade’s “few lawsuits” doesn’t include all the habitat litigation that has the same effect, since endangered species lawsuits stop work in the forest just as effectively as logging lawsuits do.<br /><br />Few lawsuits maybe, but to make sure everyone toes the line, the various environmental groups send a representative to every planning meeting to make sure that all understand the threat. It’s kind of like the mob sending a hit man to your restaurant for lunch to remind you how risky it would be to not pay your protection. So yes, not so many lawsuits about logging these days if you believe the envirospin – but that doesn’t mean that the lack of logging isn’t to blame.<br /><br />DoW ‘s email news release this morning, “Wildlife Alert”, is another envirospin magic trick. DoW says that humanity is the root problem, because people cause climate change (note that environmentalists don’t use “global warming” any more - too many freezing people are dubious of that concept). DoW snuck wildfires into the news release, hoping that no one would notice their clumping of “forest health” with all the other natural-type stuff like droughts, storms and floods. This unbelievable spin would have the reader believe that human management of forests, particularly environmentalist dictated management practices, is not a factor of catastrophic wildfire. Oh yeah, humans are the cause – envirospin tells us that humans are the source of everything bad – but <i>environmentalist </i>humans are not the problem in any way.<br /><br />Envirospin is interesting in how similar it is to other serial criminal activity. The perpetrators get more and more confident and less and less circumspect. They figure no one can catch them out. They begin to believe they’re invulnerable.<br /><br />Oh, I don’t think so.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-14415991966806216512011-06-13T18:06:00.004-06:002011-06-13T18:18:27.905-06:00Rethinking EnvironmentalismRethinking Environmentalism<br />Copyright © 2011 C. R. Edmunds<br />www.onestillfree.com<br /><br /><em> <blockquote><em>You can’t see the forest for the trees – an apt description of<br />environmentalist litigation-driven forest management resulting in fires like the more than 700 square mile Wallow Fire in Arizona.</em></blockquote></em> As the Wallow Fire in Arizona and New Mexico approaches the half-million acre mark it consumes hundreds of square miles of forest that includes protected habitat of endangered species, not to mention non-endangered species like elk, rabbits, songbirds, coyotes and – oh yeah – humans. The Wallow is not a “normal” or “healthy” wildfire. This is another in a series of catastrophic wildfires predicted to keep happening. It is a wildfire that has just destroyed what has been called the largest stand of old-growth Ponderosa pine in the world.<br /><br />For decades our resource management agencies have been slammed with lawsuit after lawsuit under the guise of protecting our environment. Even so, after the last catastrophic wildfire in Arizona (the half-million acre Rodeo-Chediski fire in 2002) President Bush passed the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. The aim was to allow federal forest management agencies to address the millions of small-diameter trees that make up so much of today’s Ponderosa pine forests. These trees aren’t saplings - they are trees that are around a century old that can’t grow any larger because of overcrowded forest conditions. They burn like matchsticks.<br /><br />The problem is that environmental groups kept suing to stop the forest restoration work. The result is litigation-managed national forests based on environmental group claims that their science is the only way to go, that somehow their science is better than any that would allow forest restoration.<br /><br />It’s not hard to understand that a million acres of burned up forest, wildlife and human habitat in under a decade in one state alone says pretty clearly that the environmentalist agenda for forest management doesn’t work. The proof is in the pudding, as they say, and the pudding has burned to a crisp.<br /><br />It is no news that forests that are not logged and that are also subject to rigorous fire suppression are at the most risk of catastrophic fire. Why, then, do environmental groups fight so hard against any other science, such as that of the science of forest restoration to maximize forest health?<br /><br />Well, when an environmental group has major income from litigation, and has a tremendous budget for soliciting donations, what do you expect? They aren’t about to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs with science that is good for the environment - they only use science that supports their litigation.<br /><br />Environmental groups make a tremendous amount of money. A quick survey of some of the top-earning “environmental conservation” groups at guidestar.com shows that these groups reported literally billions of dollars of income to the IRS last year. Yes, you read it right, billions (see sample below). And that’s just <em>one year’s </em>income. Wouldn’t you think that with that much money coming in to environmental organizations, we should see some real environmental improvement around us?<br /><br />So here’s my suggestion. The next time you receive a contribution request from an environmental group claiming they’re going to protect a plant or animal species you care about, ask yourself this: Just what has this group actually accomplished so far for the environment? Sure, they’ll tell you that the reason they need more money is because the “bad guys” (government or usually some natural resource based industry) are doing so much damage.<br /><br />I say it’s not about any anti-environment bad guys. It’s not really about the environment at all. Just follow the money.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiXhRgFI9HS89esphtHFw-Pcak_dvNpeNcAE7fqjrufP4TxxrPONtYes0t0W64HOOOTUwYORT70amPq-JTTvvifyMx8isSfNdKckN4LaDDjS-mQOk9HhalFH8uUZUUnUpfg6KcWplxwEYc/s1600/enviroincometable.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 193px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiXhRgFI9HS89esphtHFw-Pcak_dvNpeNcAE7fqjrufP4TxxrPONtYes0t0W64HOOOTUwYORT70amPq-JTTvvifyMx8isSfNdKckN4LaDDjS-mQOk9HhalFH8uUZUUnUpfg6KcWplxwEYc/s320/enviroincometable.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5617862589423800386" /></a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-57321153820400321812011-02-20T09:57:00.004-07:002011-02-20T11:55:25.230-07:00Mexican Wolf’s Enemy #1Copyright © 2011 CR Edmunds<br />www.onestillfree.com<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.mexicanwolves.org/uploads/images/mexican%20gray%20wolf%20staring.jpg"><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 201px; height: 300px;" src="http://www.mexicanwolves.org/uploads/images/mexican%20gray%20wolf%20staring.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>Right now, all over the web and in print, there are words of panic regarding the amendment to the Continuing Resolution (CR) legislation proposed by Representative Steve Pearce (R-NM). Since no formal appropriations bill has been signed for 2011, the CR allows continued funding of federal agencies (Amendment No. 342: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the continued operation of the Mexican Wolf recovery program").<br /><br />What has gotten so many people upset about cutting funding for an obviously failed program, particularly in a time when so many more critical programs are facing the axe? Pro-wolf people would like you to think that throwing more money at Mexican wolf recovery will make it work better. Mr. Pearce understands that no amount of money is going to fix what has become one of the most embarrassing of all the attempts to protect "endangered species" in the history of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), particularly when the source of the problem is the program itself.<br /><br />Let's for the moment put aside the troubling questions that put doubt on the legitimacy of the attempt to "reintroduce" Mexican wolves to begin with (two of the most obvious: Can it be called reintroduction when the animals never used the reintroduction area as native habitat? Can animals that have been bred by humans from a limited genetic pool that may not even be pure be considered a real species?). <br /><br />The base cause for the failure of the Mexican wolf program has nothing to do with ranchers or right-wing local governments, despite what the pro-wolf supporters like to claim. No, the fundamental problem with the program is actually the fact that it doesn't have any wild animals in it. <br /><br />But what are Mexican wolves if not wild animals, you ask? <br /><br />Wild animals that need the protection of the ESA need it because of outside pressures they have no control over; give them back their natural habitat or remove toxins or other outside pressures from their habitat and they proliferate like… well, like wild animals. In fact, healthy species are extraordinarily adaptable - they just need half a chance and they'll thrive. We have plenty of examples of how that works (normal wild animals can thrive even living around humans - the peregrine falcon being a case most people are familiar with). Even such rabid environmentalist groups as the Center for Biological Diversity state that the ESA is one of the most successful environmental laws in U.S. history, with hundreds of endangered species' populations increasing to sustainable, healthy levels.<br /><br />Of course, the success stories occur when humans back away from messing with the species in question and let them do their thing. The Mexican wolf has no such luck. The 50 or so wolves that the program counts are in the wild, but they are not wild - they are merely feral. This is because humans interfere with every aspect of their lives: The Mexican wolf program chooses which animals will be in the packs and which wolves will mate; pups are stolen from their mothers in the wild so they can be hand-raised in captivity; adults and half-grown wolves are trapped every few years so they can be examined and their collar batteries changed. Of course the program is a failure. It causes physical damage to the wolves (there are three-legged wolves out there because of the trapping, wolves have been run to death by program helicopters) and psychological damage (wolves become habituated to humans; they don't know how to be wild wolves after that) to the animals the program is supposed to be protecting. Every chance a Mexican wolf gets to be wild is thwarted by the intense hands-on management of the program.<br /><br />The Mexican wolf program is a Mexican wolf's worst enemy. <br /><br />The very best way to ensure that Mexican wolves thrive in the wild is to prohibit any more interference in their lives by the experts. Let the many hundreds of Mexican wolves in captivity in zoos and refuges around the country live out their lives behind bars in peace. Captivity is all they've known, after all, so they should be as content as any other predator living that way.<br /><br />And let the Mexican wolves in the wild alone, to survive as best they can. Maybe they'll make it, maybe not. But at least they'll be wild.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-83389978555760505772011-01-29T16:46:00.001-07:002011-01-29T16:47:52.972-07:00Mexican Wolves - A Human ProblemCopyright © 2011 www.onestillfree.com<br /><br />The Mexican wolf problem is actually a people problem rather than an animal problem. Mexican wolves are a subspecies of gray wolf that have been chosen for protection under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA). Unfortunately, the ESA has been used as a political weapon rather than an environmental tool, and the Mexican wolf issue is a case in point.<br /><br />The Mexican wolf reintroduction program has from its inception failed to take into account a number of critical issues which bear directly on the program's capacity for success. The points below may be verified with just a little research at the Mexican wolf program's own website - the program does not seek to hide this information, just doesn't make it very public, and doesn't incorporate these points in its management of the wolves.<br /><br /><blockquote>1. The area chosen for "reintroduction" in the United States was in fact never native denning habitat or prime hunting territory for the Mexican wolf;<br />2. The program has not taken into account the humans who live and work in the "reintroduction" area;<br />3. All wolves in the program descend from just a handful of wolves; no research has been published to demonstrate that it is even possible to rebuild a viable subspecies from such a limited gene pool; and<br />4. Almost all Mexican wolves are not actually wild, but are feral. They do not act like normal wild wolves. Almost all of the wolves are either captured or raised from conception in zoos and refuges. They are hand-fed in captivity (never learning to hunt) and routinely handled by humans (veterinary care including regular vaccinations, frequently transported from zoo to zoo and refuge to refuge, collars put on and batteries regularly changed). Perhaps worst of all, the wolves rarely are allowed the full pack experience; they do not get to choose their mates and go through the normal mating ritual (breeding matches are determined by the wolf program, not the wolves), young wolves are not taught to hunt by their parents or members of the packs they were born into since if born in the wild, many of the pups are removed from their mothers and raised in captivity. </blockquote><br />Wolves that do eventually get turned out into the wild have no idea how to act like normal, wild wolves. Several years of independently collected data demonstrates that Mexican wolves are attracted to human areas of activity, and naturally end up killing livestock and pets. Ranchers are somehow blamed for their own losses, when those losses are being enabled by Mexican wolf program management.<br /><br />Mexican wolves are not in danger of going extinct at this time, as there are hundreds of them living in captivity and that number could be increased at any time. However, Mexican wolves are not given a chance to live naturally in the wild, nor does the Mexican wolf program seem inclined to give them that chance. There is no way to know whether Mexican wolves could thrive on their own as a subspecies in a wild habitat that is native to them given the current management of this program. The Mexican wolf problem is thus entirely a human management problem.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-73665367885509321122011-01-06T13:29:00.002-07:002011-01-06T13:35:41.270-07:00Common Sense RevisitedCopyright © 2011 CR Edmunds<br />www.onestillfree.com<br /><br />This morning I was sitting in the bathroom meditating when my eye happened to fall on a package of toilet paper. On the side was printed “Common Sense By the Roll”. Common sense – toilet paper? I tell you that got me thinking.<br /><br />Some time ago I wrote about common sense but I now realize I missed the mark on the topic. Back in June 2009 I said "With the mass withdrawal from fundamental interaction with nature (growing our own food, building our own houses, being responsible for our own safety) that has resulted from mechanization, technological innovation and the internet, we have lost the need for exercising our common sense."<br /><br />I've changed my mind. I think we definitely have not lost the need for exercising common sense – we need common sense now more than ever. I’m pretty sure that such a need is obvious, based on this past year's elections, the urban legends and other nonsense posted on social media sites and emailed all over the place, the bizarre news reporting, the declining health and increased pharmaceutical use, and the continuing economic depression.<br /><br />The cumulative effect of years of believing that Big Government will take care of us has brought us exactly where we are today. I’m thinking that the Powers That Be don’t want people to use common sense because that makes it so much easier to manipulate the people. Unfortunately, the Powers That Be don’t really know how to run things very well, when it comes down to it.<br /><br />Of course, in order to understand that, you’d need common sense.<br /><br />Let me put it plainly for those lacking in common sense: If the Powers That Be were very good at running things, why are we still having the problems we have? Why are kids still not getting a good education? Why are there still no decent jobs? Why are people still losing their houses? Why are people getting sicker instead of becoming healthier? Why has there been so little advancement in alternative energy? Why are we getting patted down in airports, treated like criminals in our own country? Why are there still war, hunger and poverty in the world?<br /><br />Why, when we’ve all put so much effort and money into fixing these problems, do they still exist?<br />I submit it is because people have given up using common sense.<br /><br />Thing is, we all have the ability to use common sense and I think that most of us figure we are using common sense all the time. But if what passes for common sense isn’t based on any sort of reality, how can it be common sense at all?<br /><br />Actually, it can be. Common sense is simply what people in common would agree on; a common, natural understanding of how things are in life. Here’s the thing, though - when people base their reality on TV, movies, social media and <s>propaganda</s>a the news (let’s call all of that fiction) that’s what their common sense is based on.<br /><br />Eventually the decisions we make play out in the world. So, whatever the world we live in looks like today – be it political, educational, health or economic – that is the result of the choices we made. If we don’t like what we see, then it’s only common sense to look at why we made those decisions that got us here. After all, we can’t ultimately blame it on Big Government when we’re the ones who voted all those people in.<br /><br />Let me put it plainly again: If our kids aren’t doing as well in school as kids in other countries, if our bank accounts are going down while national debt is going up, if degenerative disease is on the rise, if alternative energy is still too expensive, if food quality is getting worse and worse, if pat-downs are only a hint of what’s to come next year, if our sons and daughters are dying in foreign countries for reasons no one fully understands any more – and if we’re the ones who have been voting all along to make things the way they are – whose fault is it that it’s this way?<br /><br />Isn’t it time to start making better decisions? Wouldn’t it be a good idea to start basing our decisions on better quality information?<br /><br />What I’m suggesting here is that if we don’t like what we see out there in the world, then maybe it’s time to stop basing our common sense on fiction and start basing it on reality. It’s time to stop taking what emails and social media and talking heads say at face value, and start looking at how things are in front of our own faces.<br /><br />I’m suggesting that we each make New Years’ Resolutions to open our eyes and ears, and think for ourselves.<br /><br />Here’s how to start: Don’t believe everything you read or hear – if it sounds too good or too conveniently simple to be true, it probably is. If it’s biased in favor or against anything, it isn’t news, it is propaganda - turn it off, delete it, turn away from it - and please! Don't pass it on!<br /><br />Start being critical about the information you are receiving. Remember the old line “follow the money” (<a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1416522913?ie=UTF8&tag=lifstr-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1416522913">All the President's Men</a><img src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=lifstr-20&l=as2&o=1&a=1416522913" width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" />, by Woodward and Bernstein)? Good advice, even if it turns out that it never was said by the informant.<br /><br />Let’s resolve to make 2011 the year of common sense. Think for yourself!credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-34135031195165088782011-01-03T13:11:00.003-07:002011-01-03T13:17:01.211-07:00Environmentalism's impact on the economyHere's a book to read in 2011: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0061375616?ie=UTF8&tag=lifstr-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0061375616">Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism Is the Solution and Not the Problem</a><img src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=lifstr-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0061375616" width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;" /><br /><br />Check out the review at <a href="http://www.discerningreader.com/book-reviews/money-greed-and-god">http://www.discerningreader.com/book-reviews/money-greed-and-god</a>. <br />From the review: "Strong laws guarding private ownership stimulates an economy while lax laws or laws prohibiting ownership will depress an economy." <br /><br />A friend of mine pointed out that laws about private ownership have been steadily eroded over the past decade or two. People lose their private property through condemnation by government, which then turns around and gives the property to commercial developers for malls (Kelo v. New London decision in 2005 says the government can do so). Here in the west we're seeing the Endangered Species Act being used as a tool to continue eroding private property rights. <br /><br />Next time you're swayed by an environmentalist group's glossy photos of big-eyed "endangered species" think twice. Not every good intention is truly a good one.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-19470431975480681382010-10-04T18:45:00.003-06:002010-10-04T18:51:08.206-06:00Mexican Wolf Impacts on Ranch Economy“Adaptive management” has been a common phrase used for the Mexican wolf recovery program, presumably because scientific data would be used to guide management decisions.... However, there has been very little scientific research on the Mexican wolf since its release into the wild, and virtually none has been made available to local producers to help them manage their livestock in the presences of wolves.<br /><br />From New Mexico State University's Range Improvement Task Force Report 80: <a href="http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/_ritf/RITF80.pdf">Reestablishment of the Mexican Gray Wolf: The Economics of Depredation</a> (PDF file)credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-19924254670819624052010-09-26T13:46:00.004-06:002010-09-26T14:00:15.253-06:00The New EnvironmentalismEnvironmental groups have learned a new tactic: Now they <s>accept bribes</s> <s>get paid off</s> work with potential defendants to not block projects via lawsuits. Brilliant. $22 million dollars buys a project two new environmental groups - more money for "environmentalism" and the project still goes through.<br /><br />Does this look a little fishy to anyone else? Is there any environmental group left that actually does environmental improvement? <br /><br />"Western Watersheds Project and the Oregon Natural Desert Association agreed not to challenge the El Paso pipeline project in exchange for establishing two new nonprofit funds… The Sagebrush Habitat Conservation Fund, established with Western Watersheds, got $15 million from El Paso. A fund set up with the Oregon Natural Desert Association got $7 million. The money will go for conservation easements and land purchases and to voluntarily retire grazing permits."<br /><br />Read about it: <a href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/09/26/1355987/new-gas-pipeline-fires-up-western.html#ixzz10f2mNbTa">www.idahostatesman.com/</a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-72561263456803381572010-09-05T11:14:00.002-06:002010-09-05T11:26:55.639-06:00Catron County: the new tribal reservation of our ageAn extraordinary and accurate article about the impacts of environmentalism on Catron County, NM. A must-read!<br /><br /><a href="http://thewesterner.blogspot.com/2010/09/wilderness-economic-revolution-catron.html">Wilderness’ Economic Revolution – Catron County</a><br />By Stephen L. Wilmeth<br /><br />....Could it be that Catron County has been for years the new tribal reservation of our age? It is there that those from afar dictate what is best for its residents. It is there that organized management of the commons is all encompassing. It is there that the voices and deeds of its citizens are suppressed by state and federal leadership that seem to be in an ever tighter lock step with the absentee environmental movement. <br /><br />There is, though, something in Catron County that some special leader must recognize. It is there that the model of modern wilderness must be reinvented . . . or the West is in a much bigger dilemma than can be imagined.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-66457575872112673162010-08-11T19:07:00.006-06:002010-08-11T19:34:29.960-06:00Tadpole rescue(Two days later) No, I did not rescue any tadpoles, but my rain gauge says I got about a quarter of an inch this afternoon - enough to fill up the main rut in the road to overflowing. Amazingly enough, at least some of those tadpoles made it to swim another day. What a beautiful demonstration of the resiliency of Mother Nature and spadefoot toads, as well as a lesson in the wisdom of evolution. Those survivors are truly tough, theirs are the genes that will contribute to species survival... if the rains keep coming.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-45389032703971093472010-08-10T18:32:00.006-06:002010-08-10T19:10:04.682-06:00When Frogs Go WrongCopyright © 2010 C. R. Edmunds<br />www.onestillfree.com<br /><br />I got to my gate this afternoon and noticed that the muddy water in the biggest rut had just about dried up. In the few shallow pools left, tadpoles were wiggling around, struggling to survive and sure to fail because there’s no rain coming today or probably even tomorrow.<br /><br />Some toadly mom made a bad choice.<br /><br />OK, before I go any further, I know some of you are going to tell me that the tadpoles in the ruts and arroyos of my ranch aren’t going to grow up to be frogs, since they’re spadefoot toads. But guess what – spadefoot toads aren’t even true toads, but are a burrowing frog after all. Confused yet? That’s OK, so are the rest of us.<br /><br />Back to Mrs. Spadefoot Toad, who made a bad choice for her tads. There were a bunch of those little critters, some frantically wiggling in the few piddling pools of water remaining, some already stranded in mud, their gold bellies exposed, their little mouths open and closing, gasping for air. Well, not air, I guess, but water to flow over their gills. A sad sight, I’ll tell you.<br /><br />I confess yesterday I rescued three or four stranded tadpoles from another puddle. I felt monumentally stupid, but I was very pleased to see them right themselves and wiggle off, apparently no worse for the wear. I poked at the few desiccated-looking bodies left in the mud but there was no response. I don’t know how many froglets had been growing in that puddle, but it had been a lot more than just the few I’d rescued.<br /><br />Who’d have thought that this morning's big water-filled rut, home to so many more tadpoles than yesterday’s puddle, would lose six inches of water in just the few hours since I’d left earlier? <br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaXpQaA1rAEOXhg4dbXpyM5wPdfBoAEND43fD8fqdsTEeMQ-a1HCYB0cBXEwBCFPIHcOSoHZD01yQIn3XvrBcjLxEvdjhi-3rzLgK3ewAqxzI1OgzuLWIpeqwFMVoWPW8xR_Afq9xQkPQF/s1600/tadpoles0810106-s.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 222px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaXpQaA1rAEOXhg4dbXpyM5wPdfBoAEND43fD8fqdsTEeMQ-a1HCYB0cBXEwBCFPIHcOSoHZD01yQIn3XvrBcjLxEvdjhi-3rzLgK3ewAqxzI1OgzuLWIpeqwFMVoWPW8xR_Afq9xQkPQF/s400/tadpoles0810106-s.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5503952860997862770" /></a><br />I was formulating a plan of action: Operation Toadlift. I’d need something like a plastic cup to scoop them up – the soft tadpole bodies might stick to the sides of an aquarium fish net. I’d need a bucket. I’d need some mosquito repellent – the little bloodsuckers sure do breed when the monsoon rains come. I looked around for a suitable arroyo with plenty of water – after all, I didn’t want to be doing this over and over. <br /><br />And then I stopped. What the heck was I doing, interfering with nature like this?<br /><br />The spadefoot toad mom produces hundreds – even a thousand or more – eggs each mating season. The tadpoles in my arroyos and ruts have just a month to eat, grow and transform into little froglets. They eat plant stuff, bugs and other invertebrates - critters without spines - including each other (but interesting enough, apparently not their siblings). For all they look like squishy, spineless, fragile things, Mother Nature has made them pretty darned tough; still, most of any batch of eggs doesn’t make it to adult froghood.<br /><br />Of course, if every one of those hundreds of spadefoot toad tads survived, walking around my ranch would be a pretty icky proposition, what with the ground being carpeted with hundreds of thousands of froglets hopping around. When Mrs. Spadefoot Toad lays that many eggs it’s her gamble that at least a few will make it – the more that do, the more the likelihood of her genes being passed on. It’s the way nature works with frogs and toads and pretty much everything that doesn’t take part in the raising of its offspring: You have loads of babies and some survive, or you have only a few - or even just one at a time - if you will be there to care for them till they can care for themselves. <br /><br />I’m sure you know about the survival of the fittest thing –the weak are weeded out and the strong live to reproduce, ensuring (as sure as anything can be in the world) that the species survives. <br /><br />Note that the <span style="font-style:italic;">species </span>is the survivor – not the individual. Mother Nature didn’t intend for every tadpole to survive – only the strongest, the most fit for the environmental conditions. My saving four tadpoles might have made me feel a little better, but it probably wasn’t in the best interests of spadefoot toad species survival. Mother Nature always has the last say, though - not only did our Mrs. Spadefoot Toad, who laid her eggs in a shallow rut in a driveway, make a bad choice, but my Operation Toadlift came to nothing either. The second puddle will be dried up by now and all those tadpoles – include my “rescued” ones – will dry up, too. There won’t be any risk of passing on the kind of genes that makes for bad decisions about which body of water to lay eggs in, so that’s good for the species. <br /><br />And maybe that’s a little lesson about environmentalism for a do-gooder, too.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-53762268517321389212010-08-10T18:04:00.001-06:002010-08-10T18:10:13.227-06:00An end to subsidized enviro lawsuits?<span style="font-weight:bold;">Citizens for Balanced Use reports:</span> <blockquote><br />Wealthy activist groups that sue the government and then force taxpayers to pick up the tab for their attorneys’ fees would now have those taxpayer subsidies disclosed to the public under legislation jointly introduced by Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. House this week.</blockquote><br /><a href="http://balanceduse.org/news/equal-access-justice-act-hot-topic-update/">More...</a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-3669409500695314232010-07-07T19:58:00.002-06:002010-07-07T20:03:02.115-06:00Tax cuts create jobs, ‘stimulus' does notJuly 6, 2010<br /><a href="http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/07/06/welcome_to_the_double_dip_recession_98558.html">Welcome to the Double-Dip Recession</a><br />By Louis Woodhill<br /><br />Whether or not the National Bureau of Economic Research ultimately agrees, we are now entering the second dip of a double-dip recession. This is because jobs are what really matter to most Americans, and the employment situation is getting worse, after a scant four months of getting better. <a href="http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/07/06/welcome_to_the_double_dip_recession_98558.html">More....</a>credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2405470535942986004.post-90256859119840583522010-07-06T19:21:00.001-06:002010-07-06T19:23:17.269-06:00Obama vs. ArizonaIt's a sorry thing when the federal government sues a state - taxpayers lose no matter who wins. You can bet that this lawsuit will cost millions. Feds are pretty free with taxpayer money in these times of economic crisis.credhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02854687309610020501noreply@blogger.com0